These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

100 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 32142047)

  • 21. Uveal and capsular biocompatibility of hydrophilic acrylic, hydrophobic acrylic, and silicone intraocular lenses.
    Abela-Formanek C; Amon M; Schild G; Schauersberger J; Heinze G; Kruger A
    J Cataract Refract Surg; 2002 Jan; 28(1):50-61. PubMed ID: 11777710
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Surface characterization and adhesion and friction properties of hydrophobic leaf surfaces.
    Burton Z; Bhushan B
    Ultramicroscopy; 2006; 106(8-9):709-19. PubMed ID: 16675115
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Limits in measurements of contact lens surface profile using atomic force microscopy.
    Brygoła R; Sęk S; Sokołowski M; Kowalczyk-Hernández M; Pniewski J
    Colloids Surf B Biointerfaces; 2018 May; 165():229-234. PubMed ID: 29486451
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. In vivo implantation of hydrophobic acrylic intraocular lenses with surface modification.
    Wang G; Cao L; Li N; Peng X; Tang H; Wan R; Gu H
    Eye Sci; 2013 Dec; 28(4):176-9. PubMed ID: 24961088
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Comparison of surface roughness and bacterial adhesion between cosmetic contact lenses and conventional contact lenses.
    Ji YW; Cho YJ; Lee CH; Hong SH; Chung DY; Kim EK; Lee HK
    Eye Contact Lens; 2015 Jan; 41(1):25-33. PubMed ID: 25536530
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Calcification in hydrophilic intraocular lenses associated with injection of intraocular gas.
    Dhital A; Spalton DJ; Goyal S; Werner L
    Am J Ophthalmol; 2012 Jun; 153(6):1154-60.e1. PubMed ID: 22325304
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Contact lens hydrophobicity and roughness effects on bacterial adhesion.
    Giraldez MJ; Resua CG; Lira M; Oliveira ME; Magariños B; Toranzo AE; Yebra-Pimentel E
    Optom Vis Sci; 2010 Jun; 87(6):E426-31. PubMed ID: 20375748
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Evaluation of pigment location in tinted soft contact lenses.
    Jung JW; Han SH; Kim SA; Kim EK; Seo KY; Kim TI
    Cont Lens Anterior Eye; 2016 Jun; 39(3):210-6. PubMed ID: 26851138
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Surface morphology of contact lenses probed with microscopy techniques.
    Guryca V; Hobzová R; Prádný M; Sirc J; Michálek J
    Cont Lens Anterior Eye; 2007 Sep; 30(4):215-22. PubMed ID: 17507281
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. In vitro examination of surface light scattering in hydrophobic acrylic intraocular lenses.
    Minami K; Maruyama Y; Honbo M; Matsunaga J; Miyata K
    J Cataract Refract Surg; 2014 Apr; 40(4):652-6. PubMed ID: 24680521
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Surface roughness and refractive index changes in contact lens induced by lens care systems.
    Lira M; Franco S; Vazquez-Dorrio JB; Real Oliveira ME; Costa MF
    Eye Contact Lens; 2014 May; 40(3):140-7. PubMed ID: 24756118
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Impact of manufacturing technology and material composition on the surface characteristics of hydrogel contact lenses.
    Maldonado-Codina C; Efron N
    Clin Exp Optom; 2005 Nov; 88(6):396-404. PubMed ID: 16329748
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Molecular layer of gaslike domains at a hydrophobic-water interface observed by frequency-modulation atomic force microscopy.
    Lu YH; Yang CW; Hwang IS
    Langmuir; 2012 Sep; 28(35):12691-5. PubMed ID: 22897342
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Force nanoscopy of hydrophobic interactions in the fungal pathogen Candida glabrata.
    El-Kirat-Chatel S; Beaussart A; Derclaye S; Alsteens D; Kucharíková S; Van Dijck P; Dufrêne YF
    ACS Nano; 2015 Feb; 9(2):1648-55. PubMed ID: 25621738
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Cell adhesion on explanted intraocular lenses part 2: experimental study of a surface-modified IOL in rabbits.
    Ishikawa N; Miyamoto T; Okada Y; Saika S
    J Cataract Refract Surg; 2011 Jul; 37(7):1339-42. PubMed ID: 21700111
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Reduced silicone oil adherence to silicone intraocular lens by surface modification with 2-methacryloyloxyethyl phosphoryl-choline.
    Huang XD; Li HY; Lin L; Yao K
    Curr Eye Res; 2013 Jan; 38(1):91-6. PubMed ID: 22742824
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Effect of surface modifications of intraocular lenses on the adherence of Staphylococcus epidermidis.
    Schmidt H; Schlöricke E; Fislage R; Schulze HA; Guthoff R
    Zentralbl Bakteriol; 1998 Jan; 287(1-2):135-45. PubMed ID: 9532272
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Investigation of surface properties of soil particles and model materials with contrasting hydrophobicity using atomic force microscopy.
    Cheng S; Bryant R; Doerr SH; Wright CI; Williams PR
    Environ Sci Technol; 2009 Sep; 43(17):6500-6. PubMed ID: 19764208
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. [Comparison of postoperative results after implantation of hydrophilic acrylic or hydrophobic acrylic intraocular lens: data of one-year prospective clinical study].
    Zemaitiene R; Speckauskas M; Glebauskiene B; Jasinskas V
    Medicina (Kaunas); 2008; 44(12):936-43. PubMed ID: 19142051
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Clinically Relevant Optical Properties of Bifocal, Trifocal, and Extended Depth of Focus Intraocular Lenses.
    Gatinel D; Loicq J
    J Refract Surg; 2016 Apr; 32(4):273-80. PubMed ID: 27070236
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 5.